THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

ZiPS has Ackley as a .311 wOBA hitter; Oliver differs quite a bit having him at .335. Split the difference, and you get Ackley as roughly a -2 hitter as a second baseman. . I’m not sure what to make of his defense or baserunning yet, so let’s just call it even. Add in the positional adjustment, that gets him to 0 RAA or roughly a 2-2.5 WAR player.

Projections love Strasburg, having him as 3-4 win pitcher even after hedging their bets a bit with projected innings totals. Considering there is no question who has the higher upside, I’d go with Strasburg.

Does ZiPS RoS account for minor league numbers or just MLB numbers?

The question comes down to this: for their first 7 seasons (cost-controlled), who will generate the most WAR?

And if you want a second question: who will generate the most career WAR?

My gut feeling is to go with Ackley. Now, reasoning!

Tommy John does work out for most pitchers, but there is still a pretty substantial risk that Strasburg isn’t the same post-surgery.

ZiPS seems to be discounting his power quite a bit (for some reason I’m not sure). His RoS projection is for a .115 ISO, lower than any ISO he posted at any level, even in 2010 when he was presumably focusing a LOT on learning his new position.

I honestly think a reasonable average season projection for Ackley through his team control years is a .355 wOBA with average 2B defense and above-average baserunning. So 4-5 WAR/year (depending on what you think of his defense).

If Strasburg is good enough and will stay healthy enough to put up top-10 pitcher WAR over the next five years, then he will beat my Ackley projection. I don’t think Strasburg is that tier, though, so I choose Ackley.

Except for his 2010 season, Ackley has been very consistent in his MLEs at THT Forecasts.

Year Level         PA wOBA  BA/ OB/ SA  BH  HR  BB  SO
2008 Coll/Summer  397  365 310/387/439 371 018 118 166
2009 Coll/Fall    409  351 281/354/447 336 042 083 171
2010 AA/AAA/Fall  674  324 254/339/389 297 021 111 165
2011 AAA/MLB      472  361 284/367/465 312 038 123 136
ROS Oliver             335 268/346/414 312 029 107 166

In 2010 he had a BABIP lower than his previous years, but his BB and SO were as expected.

If you choose to discount 2010, the other three years show a 350-365 wOBA.

Oliver rated Ackley extremely poor at 2b in 2010 (his first year there) at -13.1, but in 2011 a fairly average -0.2.

The long range forecast has Ackley with a 340’s wOBA with a -5 glove, good for 1.5-2.0 WAR. If you presume a 360 wOBA and a neutral glove, he’s like 2.5-3.5 over the next 7 years.

If Strasburg is projected at 3.00 to 3.40 ERA, 200-220 innings, that’s about 6 WAR a year.

As mentioned in the article, I think Ackley’s upside is seriously underrated. He could very easily put up Joe Mauer type numbers with the stick, which would make him roughly a 6.5 WAR player if average 2b defense. That’d be in line with the best pitcher in the game.

For the first seven seasons, I’ll definitely take Ackley, since we know for certian that Strasburg is going to miss over a full season.

For their career, I’ll take Ackley because it’s just too damn tough to predict which of the stud pitchers will to stay healthy.

I think the point is that you won’t forecast Strasburg for 1400 innings over his first 7 years.  Obviously, if you have that forecast, there is no discussion here.

Are we going to see CC/Felix innings or Prior innings or ??

33 starts at 6 IP per is 198 IP, so if a pitcher doesn’t miss any starts, but also doesn’t go deep, he can get 200 IP. Or 31 GS at 6.5 IP/GS.

Strasburg was widely considered to being handled gently, but hadn’t missed a start and was on pace for just about 200 IP. Of course I won’t expect that in 2012, his first year back, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable for 2013-17.

The biggest thing is if he gets hurt again. Many guys get TJ and don’t get re-injured. Prior never had such luck.

From 2006-2010 only 13 pitchers averaged 200 IP per year. I’ll take under 1000 on Strasburg from 2013-2017.

In 2010, Martin Prado had a .352 wOBA with 651 PAs, a few runs below average in the field, and a few above running for 4.4 WAR.
That seems like the kind of line I expect from Ackley through his team control years (albeit with a lower avg and higher slg).

Over five seasons, that would be 22 WAR. Only 8 pitchers reached that mark from 2006-2010.

Strasburg is good, for sure, but how sure are you that he can maintain a level over that period of time with pitchers like Halladay? Verlander? Lee? Santana?

This blows my mind. It is a serious case of “he’s been injured for awhile so we forgot about his talent” bias.

It’s not close. Strasburg.

#10/Eric:

Your argument is so ridiculously flawed and biased it is laughable. Using your arguments:

8 pitchers have reached 22 WAR from 2006-2010. How many 2b have reached that mark from 2006-2010? The answer: EXACTLY ONE. Chase Utley.

“Ackley is good, for sure, but how sure are you that he can maintain a level over that period of time with batters like Utley? Utley? Utley? Utley?”

This is beyond the fact that you probably can’t project Ackley to have a 4.4 WAR in 2012 with any level of confidence due to major regression toward the mean.

Here’s a better question: How many 2b have done what Ackley has done, peripheral wise? Compare this to Strasburg.

Dave’s post smacks of rampant homerism and flawed analysis.

This is beyond madness to consider Ackley is anywhere close to the standard above replacement that Strasburg is.

#6/rwperu:

“He could very easily put up Joe Mauer type numbers with the stick...”

Very easily? Exactly HOW many other players have ever done that? And what of Ackley’s performance leads to to predict such a ridiculous outlier? Regression does not apply here?

Mauer’s bat an outlier? Since he’s been in the league, he’s 18th in MLB in wOBA.

Ackley’s upside is vastly underrated. Strasburg’s downside is vastly underrated. This makes it a much closer call than perceived...even if Strasburg had not already had TJ and missed a full season. Given the injury, Ackley only needs to produce about 80% of the value on a per year basis to equal Strasburg over the team controlled years.

What’s really happening is a serious case of “We forget the risk involved with young pitchers and year after year overrate them on prospect lists compared to seemingly lesser talented hitters” bias.

Kyle: the question here is SOLELY about how many innings you can expect Strasburg, OR ANYONE, to possibly have over a 7 year period.

You go through every great pitcher through the age of 24, and then find out how many innings they’ve pitched AFTER that.

This is the point that Dave is trying to make.  No one is arguing Strasburg’s talent, just like no one is arguing Prior, Peavy, Bedard, Johan, or any other pitcher’s talent… when they pitch.

The argument is how many innings can you expect, given that a pitcher often gets hurt.

CC and Felix and Doc are exceptions.

Utley’s upside is being short changed as well.

Strasburg was sitting at 97 with his fastball with great control while having great secondary stuff.  That is just ridiculous.  Better than Prior ever was in my opinion, and quite frankly pretty much anyone else.

Ackley is probably an overall average defensive player (quite a bit of difference from Mauer there), and has an .155 ISO in the upper minors in 772 AB, 483 of those AB in the very very hitter friendly PCL at what is probably considered an average prospect age.  Those are the knocks on him, and very real ones. 

I just can’t see taking Ackley over Strasburg who quite frankly has/had the tools to be in the conversation with all-time greats.

It’s amazing how some people are being myopic.  NO ONE is questioning Strasburg’s talent.  NO ONE.  So, why is it necessary to keep bringing up his talent?

The question, the primary question, is how many innings you can expect from him (or anyone) over a 7 year period.

You should not answer in this thread until you can provide your estimate.

Huh? The title reads “Strasburg v Ackley”.  What exactly do you think that means?  Then under it it says “Prior v Mauer” while I think most agree Strasburg is a superior talent to Prior and Mauer is a superior talent to Ackley. 

On to the “primary question” despite your #3* saying yet again something different it would be interesting to see something done looking at IP the following 5 years after 15 months of TJS of pitchers. 

*While both are healthy I don’t think it’s too crazy to say Strasburg is 1.7 the player Ackley is, so he could be hurt about half the time as Ackley and still be as valuable, which answers your #3 kind of.  Then again, Ackley may have been playing down to his competition in the minors and maybe the power surge in the bigs is real.

I propose a compliment to the Tom Seaver rule. We can call it the Kerry Wood rule. No unproven pitcher can be projected to make more than 25 starts per year.

There were 35 pitchers born between 1918 and 1979 who by the time they were 24 had:
- at least 50 starts
- allowed runs at 85% or better of the league average

Basically, this is our group of great young pitchers.

In the 7 years following, they had an average of 1292 innings, from Robin Roberts’ 2180 IP to Don Gullett’s 329.

If I limit it to pitchers born since 1952 (to coincide with different pitching patterns), I have 19 pitchers, and the average is 1248 IP.

If I limit it to pitchers born since 1962 (Roger Clemens), I have 13 pitchers averaging 1227 IP.

I think that becomes our best estimate: an average of 175 IP per year for 7 years, which is, frankly, higher than I expected.

If you put Strasburg’s talent at +0.30 WAR per 9 IP, that gives you 41 WAR over 7 years.  If you put his talent at +0.25 WAR per 9 IP, then it’s 34 WAR over 7 years.

From 2004-2010, the pitching leaders in WAR using Fangraphs is Roy Halladay at 40, followed by CC at 39 and Santana at 38.

From 1997-2003, it was Pedro at 60, RJ at 56, Schilling at 49, Greg Maddux at 43, Clemens at 42, and Mussina at 41.

Those are of course after-the-fact numbers, and, we already said, we’re going to discount Strasburg to pitching to 175 innings per year.

We’re basically setting his talent at just below Pedro/RJ and above Schilling.

Now, among nonpitchers, the WAR leaders from 2004-2010 was Pujols at 59 WAR, Utley at 46, ARod at 45, and a dropoff to Wright at 37.

It’s clear that you can’t forecast Ackley (or anyone, be it Heyward, Stanton, Harper or whoever) to this level.

A forecast for a top nonpitcher (outside of the ubertalent of Pujols/ARod) over 7 years would have to be at best 30 WAR.

Therefore, yes, the comparison is not apt, if the Strasburg forecast for innings is 175 per year.

In order for the comparison to be legitimate, Strasburg’s innings per year has to be all the way down to 130.  If you can do that, if you can show that’s a legitimate forecast, then, yes, Strasburg v Ackley (or anyone really) can be a fair debate.

The question, the primary question, is how many innings you can expect from him (or anyone) over a 7 year period.

If we go back to 2002-2003, the best starting pitchers who were born in 1975 or earlier were the following, with IP in 2004-2010 as listed:

Mark Prior 329
Brandon Webb 1139
Tim Hudson 1236.7
Roy Oswalt 1513
Barry Zito 1430.3
Roy Halladay 1455.7
Mark Mulder 536.7
Kerry Wood 417.7

Good stuff Mike, exactly the kind of work I expect.  That averages 144 IP per year.

I meant 1975 or *later* in #22, but I see that Tango already looked at a much larger sample in #21, so other than putting a few recent examples out there, my post #22 doesn’t add much.

#21, nice work.  The only problem I can see is before Strasburg had TJS people were predicting an injury.  So he may come back with bad mechanics still (Kyle may be able to better speak on this).  And the group of pitchers your using may not have had those injury concerns.

Sean: right, I’m not suggesting that this group is the ideal group.  It’s *a* data point.

Mike’s data points, while smaller, might be more legitimate because they may better track more injury-prone pitchers.  Also, the more recent pitchers will tell you better about pitcher usage.  Robin Roberts and his 2100 innings is just not a legitimate data point today.

It seems hard to believe we can estimate 175 IP per year for 7 years for Strasburg.  150 seems a better gut-level estimate.  125 seems justifiable too.

So, when you get to the 125-150 level, all of a sudden, we’re talking about a 30 WAR pitcher.

A better way to think of Strasburg is that you must have Kershaw ahead of Strasburg in terms of expected WAR, even if you think Strasburg is the better pitcher (when he pitches).

Now, it’s no longer Strasburg being thought of along the lines of Pedro/RJ, which I think is the myopic view (i.e., presumes he will pitch 200 IP per year for 7 years).

That averages 144 IP per year.

The scary thing about that list is there is no “average” pitcher.

They either threw more than ~1000 IP or less than ~500 IP.

So, they were basically boom or bust ... which seems to be how feel about Strasburg. He’s either going to rule the world with an iron fist or be injured. He won’t be pitching poorly. So, realistically, he probably puts up 3 or 4 6-7 WAR seasons and misses 2 seasons with injury, with him earning 4-5 WAR during his partial seasons.

To me, the Ackley projections need more scrutinity. I’ve been in this discussion at FG, and there Ackley is presumed to be the next Utley, as if it’s a done deal.

Personally, I don;t think he’s going to have enough power to sustain the Cano, Pedroia, Kinsler, Utley type performance that he’s had in his 1st 150 PAs. I don’t think he’s going to have plus defense to compensate for those times when he’ll have bad BABIP luck.

I stated that I thought he would be good for 3-3.5 WAR/y.

So, over 7 years I have ...

Strasburg: 25-33 WAR
Ackley: 21-25 WAR

It’s close enough that, IMHO, the discussion is valid while noting the drastic difference in ability above peers.

Strasburg: 25-33 WAR
Ackley: 21-25 WAR

That’s as reasonable an estimate as anyone will give you!

See, once you are forced to quantify your various feelings and loose thoughts, to consolidate them into an over/under kind of bet, then things become much clearer (if more boring).

When I think of a single, current picther that represents what Strasburg’s career might look like, I think of Jake Peavy ... probably because their deliveries are similar (PAS elbow goes toward 1B, late rotation of shoulder, etc).

Peavy put up 24 WAR ove rhis 1st 7 seasons.

SS’s also has some similarities with John Smoltz ... so, there’s a “chance” for some longevity.

So a healthy Strasburg would project at ~150 IP per year, 750 over the rest of his team control. How much does the TJ lower that? maybe to 600 IP? With a win rate of 0.25-0.30/9, that gives Strasburg a range of 17-25 WAR...assuming he comes back as a 6 WAR/200 IP pitcher right away...or ever.

Who are the guys that have come off of TJ and had 17+ WAR over their next five years? A few names that roll off my tongue are Kerry Wood and Josh Johnson as the poster boys for success. Wood fell just short and Johnson is going to be very close, one way or the other. Another good comp would be Fransisco Liriano. Oliver had to project his 2007 nearly as good as Strasburg 2011, right?

I’m still taking the under at 17 WAR.

@31 rwp

You seem to be stuck in semantic arguments. We get that you think Ackley is the better choice. The idea is quantify the projections.

26/Tango nails it. Our ideal projection is 175 IP, as shown earlier. But TJ has to be a penalty… and it’s a tricky one to apply. It would be interesting to see all of the IP data by age after TJ. In any case, a gut feeling of -25 IP/year seems right, which would put Stras at 150 IP/y. I like that estimate a lot.

Some of you don’t realize that the only pitchers in big league history with better FIP than Strasburg’s rookie FIP was 99 Pedro, 01 Pedro, 95 Johnson, and 84 Gooden. That’s it. That is the list. Dustin Ackley is not a historical player. Strasburg and his rookie 2.10 FIP is.

pm/33: see Tango/18.

Let’s ballpark this using a 5.50 rep level ERA and 2.25 ERA for Strasburg:

25 IP: .9 WAR/yr, 6.3 WAR/7yrs
50 IP: 1.8 WAR/yr, 12.6 WAR/7yrs
75 IP: 2.7 WAR/yr, 19.0 WAR/7yrs
100 IP: 3.6 WAR/yr, 25.3 WAR/7yrs
125 IP: 4.5 WAR/yr, 31.6 WAR/7yrs
150 IP: 5.4 WAR/yr, 37.9 WAR/7yrs
175 IP: 6.3 WAR/yr, 44.2 WAR/7yrs
200 IP: 7.2 WAR/yr, 50.6 WAR/7yrs
225 IP: 8.1 WAR/yr, 56.9 WAR/7yrs

The Kyle Boddy argument doesn’t conflict with the IP discussion. Even at 100-125 IP per season, it’d be hard to pick Ackley over Strasburg because of how awesome Strasburg’s innings are (not that 100-125 IP is a given).  If he can average the 150 innings of the healthy comps, he’s a clear winner. And then there’s the awesome upside that would make him the most valuable pitcher of the next decade and a Hall-of-Famer.

You can’t estimate his true talent at 2.25 ERA (i.e., 50-55% of league average) over a 7 year period. 

Please, let’s not have this discussion again.

Shades of Gassko/Strasburg/Oliver once again!

rwperu using wOBA to compare Mauer with others is also ridiculous. The top leaders in wOBA are overwhelmingly sluggers with high walk rates. Ackley’s skillset is very much not that.

I ask again: How many players have ever had Mauer-type numbers (extremely high BA/OBP driving wOBA).

Kyle, I’m just curious. What type of stats do you think a guy who is drafted #2 overall based on his ability to hit for a high average and draw walks is going to put up when he hits his upside?

Hypothetical, Tango.

From 1990-2003 there were 20 starting pitcher prospects who were in BAs top 10 in the year they exhausted their rookie eligibility.

They averaged 794 IP over their first 6+ years, many in relief. That’s 113 per season. The top two were Steve Avery (1222) and Ben Sheets (1229). The bottom two were Jesse Foppert (122) and Rick Ankiel (242).

The group averaged 124 GS over their first 6+ years, an average of 17.7 per year. Steve Avery was the only one to make over 200 starts with MAtt Clement, Josh Beckett, and Ben Sheets all in the 190s. Foppert only made 23 career starts.

rwp: excellent work, thanks.

I think because of Strasburg’s expectations, you’d probably want to remove anyone who had relief appearances, since Strasburg would never have done that.

pm/33: what about

68 Gibson, 63 Koufax, 65 Koufax, 71 Seaver, 80 Richard, 72 Carlton, 55 Mossi, 68 Tiant, 68 Moose, 66 Koufax, 66 Jarvis, 72 Reuschel, 64 Koufax, 65 McDowell, and 68 Sutton?

#41:

And are all BA top 10 players the same? Are all first picks the same? Is Strasburg the same as every other first pick starting pitcher?

There are A LOT of variables that are being passed over because it is convenient to neglect them in this argument. Everyone is in love with penalizing Strasburg due to TJ surgery and the fact that he’s a pitcher; no one has talked about the attrition rate for second basemen.

Dave glosses over Ackley’s “pedestrian” MiLB numbers; these are not some numbers that can just be thrown out.

I also enjoyed the rwperu argument of “what do you expect when the third pick hits his upside?” Well, let me tell you: Not a ludicrous outlier like Joe Mauer’s BA/OBP. And if you do expect this, please apply it to every other player that fits the mold. Your argument will fall apart rapidly.

What is being done to Ackley (by some, not Tango) is the same thing that was being done to Strasburg wrt the Oliver/Gassko argument. It was irresponsible then and it’s irresponsible now.

Juan Cruz and Arthur Rhodes were predominantly relievers. Without them, the averages are 132 starts, 829 IP.

Bruce Chen had 100 starts and 97 relief appearances, although IMO he violates the spirit of the list since 32 of those starts came in his final arb season. Without Chen, Cruz, and Rhodes, the averages are 134 GS, 834 IP.

The rest of the relief innings are guys who were starters, got injured, and had to move to relief.

Kyle, Who are these guys in the mold of Ackley that have his BA/OBP upside? In terms of BA/OBP, what are there five guys? Are you really telling me you can’t see Ackley hitting .310/.390/.455 when things go right? I think you think Mauer’s bat is more of an outlier than it is. The thing that makes Mauer’s bat so special is not the bat itself, but the glove that comes with it.

WRT #41, when it comes to health, yes, I would say all top 10 pitchers are the same. So the question is, how much of GS and IP are due to talent and how much health?

"Who are these guys in the mold of Ackley that have his BA/OBP upside? In terms of BA/OBP, what are there five guys?”

This is precisely my point. Why do you think Ackley is such an outlier? What has he done to warrant this type of projection? Please show me the numbers and account for regression.

Upside. Upside. Upside. Projection=.340wOBA ~3 WAR

You have answered none of my questions and provided a projection that has no empirical justification. OK.

I can’t answer your questions because they make no sense to me. I can’t understand why a guy with a lifetime wRC+ of 132 (128 minors, 163 majors), was the #2 overall pick based almost entirely on his ability to hit for average, was the #11 overall prospect based almost entirely on his BA/OBP combo, and already has a wRC+ median projection of ~115 can’t have an upside of a 130 wRC+. Explain to me that.

I gave numbers from THT Forecasts (Oliver) for Ackley in #5.

A few other ways

Year Level         PA wOBA  BA/ OB/ SA  BH  HR  BB  SO
2011 AAA/MLB      472  361 284/367/465 312 038 123 136
FY MLB Proj            346 284/353/446 318 032 099 146
2009->2011 Proj        354 294/364/443 334 030 100 163

Ackley’s 2011 MLE, including both MiLB & MLB, is a .361 wOBA. His full year projection (MLB year to date plus projected rest of season) is .346

After the 2009 season, when his experience was the ACC in College, the Cape Cod League, and the Arizona Fall League, his 2011 projection was .354.

In a good year he could quite likely have a 310-320 BA. His home run rate is slightly below MLB average. His BB and SO rates are both moderately better than MLB average, and he has improved both in 2011. His BABIP is moderately above MLB average.

The numbers are extremely consistent, and give you a good profile of the kind of batter Ackley is. I expect about 20-25 WAR over 2011-17.

Thanks Brian.

Great article from Jeff Sullivan on Ackley:
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2011/8/4/2344599/an-assortment-of-thoughts-on-dustin-ackley

Ackley does not have a home run swing, which may be deceiving.

By “home run swing”, I mean the typical stiff front leg + big follow through. Not a huge and obvious “hip rotation guy”.

Sullivan said

Maybe you’re disappointed by the prospect of a guy coming up and being about as good as he’s going to be.

... and my first thought was “Justin Upton” ... as if Upton’s age 20 season was going to turn into .395 with 55 HR by age 26. Besides Upton was “LeBronesque” in that he was a 20yo in a 27yo’s body. He was a MAN at 20. He didn’t come in like a 155 pound Eric Davis, or a 135 pound Ted Williams.

Ackley’s swing is more “Ichiro” (really) than Howard or Fielder, and that is very interesting.

Interestingly enough, when I saw Ackley’s swing, I thought “Wow that does look sorta like Utley” (short, quick stroke ... smooth, similar follow through).

But, here’s the BIG difference (and it is a BIG difference). Note the front-leg.

Chase Utley
http://astro.temple.edu/~tuc06429/Images/Utley.jpg

Dustin Ackley
http://i.usatoday.net/sports/_photos/2011/06/28/2009-No-2-pick-Dustin-Ackley-debuts-performs-4T6LL1V-x-large.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2734/4088820937_ed1e5cc9bf.jpg

There’s also the issue of swing plane, which you can also see in the pictures (Utley v. Ackley). Both guys are making contact on balls at the belt.

Utley’s hands have more tilt, meaning he’s going to hit the ball in the air more often (and further).

IMHO, Utley is an absolute freak of nature. There’s no way a swing as short as his, from a body his size, should result in so much power.

Anyway, the result is that Ackley will hit for significantly less power, but due to a flatter plan will feature the barrel in the zone longer (ala Pujols) and be able to hit to all fields very well. In that regard, names like “Mauer” come into play where his power is really “left center to center” type power. Not surprisingly, he hits “up the middle”.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/player/dustin-ackley/hitchart/744982

Chase Utley is just a different dude. He’s listed at 6’1 200, but IMO, he’s lighter than that ... and I wouldn’t be surprised if he had a 32-in waist. He’s not a big guy, but he’s a freak with great mechanics and the right swing plane. You wanna see visual examples of what I’m talking about in his uniqueness ... watch his at bats vs. CC in the WS. I saw that and it hit me that people have no idea how special (physically, strength per size) and amazing (mechanically). The fact that he cusses a lot makes it an official man crush.

Completely random, but it’s amazing how similar Ackley’s season looks likes Bret Barberie’s 1991 year.  Same age, performance in AAA/MLB.  I’m sure that is a blast from the past for Tango.

He’s baaaack!! 5 IP, 2 H, 0 BB, 4 K in Strasburg’s return. 40 strikes, 16 balls. Average heater 97 mph, peak 99 mph. He only threw 12 off speed pitches.

Game wasn’t shown here (turned TV on at 9).  How did he look?

Given the results, I can only imagine I didn’t watch though. I got all the pitch fx data from brooks baseball.

With the Mauer/Prior comparison, it seems there is an underlying “Who should’ve gone #1?” question here.

Throughout this discussion, and as Tango points out repeatedly, it’s clear that Strasburg is a far superior talent. And everybody is estimating his future WAR on some kind of average. But circlechange brings up what I think is a key point in #28: “So, they were basically boom or bust ... which seems to be how feel about Strasburg.”

Now, Strasburg went #1, so if he turns out to be better than Ackley, nobody can fault Seattle (of course you can fault them for not taking a third player instead of Ackley, but that’s not relevant here). But with Strasburg, a guy who had a high injury risk to begin with, how much of a “penalty” do you apply there? If Ackley is “guaranteed” to be a 20-25 WAR player and Strasburg is likely to be 25-30 (or whatever) unless his arm falls off - pretty likely - and he turns out to be a 2 WAR player because his career goes the way of so many pitchers before, well, how much do we consider that?

In other words, I think using average from some data set of pitchers here just doesn’t work because there seems to be a very high likelihood of Strasburg pitching 0 innings for a significant portion of his team control years. At the very least, it’s much higher than the possibility that Ackley will get 0 PAs during that same time.

Maybe I’m not a ballsy enough, but if you asked me right now who will have more WAR by the year 2017, I’d put money on Ackley just because I don’t trust pitchers to be healthy.

Yes, the boom-bust thing is probably the best way to think about it.

It’s easy to give Strasburg a ceiling of Maddux/RJ/Clemens (or if you are feeling particularly ballsy: Pedro).  But what about the downside? 

It’s the same thing I did with Jeter.  How do you handle a late 30s player?  Well, he’s got a good chance of continuing being great, like Molitor, but also a good chance of not contributing anything any longer.

Pitchers are a bit like that.

The game was televised locally here in DC, of course. I watched the game and came away thinking Strasburg looked as you would expect him to. The command was pretty good (though not pinpoint) and the velocity was a tick or two down but all of that is to be expected for his first start back, I think.

Besides the Gordon double in the first, there were a couple of hard-hit balls from Loney and Miles but they went right to the corner outfielders and neither dropped in.

The more I watch him, though, the more I wonder if he’s going to develop a HR problem. He seems to throw the 4-seamer more than the 2-seamer and when a hitter can catch up to it, they tend to hit it in the air pretty hard. I wonder if, with age and the likely drop in velocity, he will develop a sinker (a la King Felix).